That's the weakness of the American system. Third parties outside of the mainstream have made significant progress everywhere in the world except America.
In Parliamentary systems, in order to govern, if no party gets a majority they must enter into coalitions to form a government. In the USA system, that coalition building has mostly been done within the two parties.
The Democratic Party has it's progressive wing and it's centrist wing.
As for the GOP, it seems now unfortunately that there is only the MAGA wing.
On further thought on the "stifle" assertion. As I noted before, having run for Congress and also staying involved since,. the so-called third parties simple don't DO THE WORK. They don't canvass, knock on doors, etc. Speaking from experience, the Democratic Party county and district organizations go all out handing out literature, knocking doors to speak to voters- Our couny party is fully active and organized in this manner.
From where I sit, the third parties such as Libertarians and Greens simply toss candidates onto the ballot and then fade away until the next election.
And for the most part, most of the Green party platform is also present in much of the Democratic party positions anyway
Thanks for that insight and for sharing your experience. I'm sure that what you say is correct. And I especially agree with your last sentence, which I would extend to a general rule: The primary historical function of third parties in American politics has been to generate interest in issues, to the extent that the major parties have to pay attention to them. The most striking example comes from the 1890s, when the Populist party attracted great attention. The Democrats essentially adopted the Populist platform in 1896. The Populists disappeared but their cause carried on under the banner of the Democrats.
I don't agree that the two major parties stifle other "third parties." While I don't know the election laws in all the states I am familiar with Michigan's for the most part having run for Congress myself in 2016. To get on the ballot as a Democrat, I had to get over 1000 signatures on petitions - a time consuming and manpower intensive process. My incumbent Republican opponent had to do the same.
On the ballot that year in our district were a Libertarian and a Green Party candidate. They merely had to get nominated at their respective party's state convention.
Brands writes: "The fresh thinking third and fourth parties bring to a campaign is a good thing too.
. . . One of the few things the two major parties agree on is the need to stifle third parties." A story (possibly apocryphal) from the JFK era goes this way: At a summit conference, JFK asked Khrushchev why the USSR just had one party. The latter replied: "Well, we just have one party less than you Americans do."
That's the weakness of the American system. Third parties outside of the mainstream have made significant progress everywhere in the world except America.
In Parliamentary systems, in order to govern, if no party gets a majority they must enter into coalitions to form a government. In the USA system, that coalition building has mostly been done within the two parties.
The Democratic Party has it's progressive wing and it's centrist wing.
As for the GOP, it seems now unfortunately that there is only the MAGA wing.
On further thought on the "stifle" assertion. As I noted before, having run for Congress and also staying involved since,. the so-called third parties simple don't DO THE WORK. They don't canvass, knock on doors, etc. Speaking from experience, the Democratic Party county and district organizations go all out handing out literature, knocking doors to speak to voters- Our couny party is fully active and organized in this manner.
From where I sit, the third parties such as Libertarians and Greens simply toss candidates onto the ballot and then fade away until the next election.
And for the most part, most of the Green party platform is also present in much of the Democratic party positions anyway
Thanks for that insight and for sharing your experience. I'm sure that what you say is correct. And I especially agree with your last sentence, which I would extend to a general rule: The primary historical function of third parties in American politics has been to generate interest in issues, to the extent that the major parties have to pay attention to them. The most striking example comes from the 1890s, when the Populist party attracted great attention. The Democrats essentially adopted the Populist platform in 1896. The Populists disappeared but their cause carried on under the banner of the Democrats.
I don't agree that the two major parties stifle other "third parties." While I don't know the election laws in all the states I am familiar with Michigan's for the most part having run for Congress myself in 2016. To get on the ballot as a Democrat, I had to get over 1000 signatures on petitions - a time consuming and manpower intensive process. My incumbent Republican opponent had to do the same.
On the ballot that year in our district were a Libertarian and a Green Party candidate. They merely had to get nominated at their respective party's state convention.
Brands writes: "The fresh thinking third and fourth parties bring to a campaign is a good thing too.
. . . One of the few things the two major parties agree on is the need to stifle third parties." A story (possibly apocryphal) from the JFK era goes this way: At a summit conference, JFK asked Khrushchev why the USSR just had one party. The latter replied: "Well, we just have one party less than you Americans do."